I'd put this on /his/ but the board is terrible so I'll ask here:
How were slaves treated in the southern states before it was ended? Apparently a small amount of people kept slaves, and the majority that did owned fewer than ten and would work alongside them in the field. That doesn't seem terrible at all, and it honestly seems a bit like a partnership in a way, if not simple employment.
Slaves would cost a few hundred dollars, and that isn't taking into account the upkeep and treatment it would take to have them healthy and able to work. It would be like buying a car and shooting the tires every time it didn't do something you wanted it to, forcing you to fix the tires or replace the entire car. That doesn't make sense, especially if you're not a plantation owner with money to throw around.
Is it possible that a lot of slavery "horror stories" were exaggerated or simply made up to promote being treated better because they were victims?
P.S. why would the evil Confederate general Lee not have slaves yet good guy general Grant keep his? Why did so many Black's want to fight for and with the Confederacy if they were treated like shit? Why did the evil Confederacy pay its white and black soldiers the same wage but the good, not racist everyone is equal Union pay blacks almost half the wage of their white comrades?
Bump. Please respond.
>>56479442
is this a serious question you cumskin? of course they were treated like shit just read anything about it at all on google and shut the fuck up this is the stupidest shit I have seen today on here and that says a lot
>>56480092
Wow.
>>56480092
asalaam alaikum, brother. glad to see someone laying the hurt on these woods.
>>56479442
How well would you treat your farm equipment that cost a couple thousand dollars? Nigger cant work if you beat him to a bloody pulp weekly. And even though they were slaves the possibility of an uprising was always there.
I dont think it was all that great but it is in no way like what this guy is saying >>56480092
>>56479442
According to family history they were treated decent. They were paid a wage (hence the term slave wages), they were allowed to go to town and even date slaves from other plantations. It was not near as bad as it was painted to be. The ones who mistreated the slaves were a small minority.
>>56479442
>I'd put this on /his/ but the board is terrible so I'll
stick it on KKK central instead
Sounds like a plan, Einstein.
>>56480546
I'd treat my slaves pretty well, especially if I were working alongside them.
>>56480990
I didn't know that about slave wages, but then again I never thought about it. Your family owned slaves? Anything else you can say about it?
>>56481179
I figured here I'd get good responses instead of the usual.
>>56479442
In the early 1900s the federal government published a book called The Slave Chronicles, or something like that. It was interviews with many former slaves. The vast majority looked back with fond memories.
Remember that the few % of families that even owned slaves at all had only 1 or 2, and they were treated like members of the family. Many had their own money, and some even lent to their masters in times of need.
Treatment of slaves was regulated. There are horror stories no doubt, but they are few and far between in reality. Slaves who were too old to work had to be provided for.
Compare that to freemen in, say, Massachusetts, who routinely starved because there were no laws protecting blacks.
History is written by the winners, and many of the accounts from abolitionist propaganda about the horrors of chattel slavery were cherry-picked, embellished, and even fabricated outright.
If you can find a copy, get the book "America's Caesar" by Greg Durand. It is full of research from contemporary sources.
>>56479442
>How were slaves treated in the southern states before it was ended?
actually, there's a good book on this
https://archive.org/details/southsideviewofsl00adam
>>56479442
>>How were slaves treated in the southern states before it was ended?
Largely like shit, but it depended on the slave owner. Someone in my family tree got disowned by his father for breaking up a slave family by selling the father.
>>56481800
>>56481865
Thank you for this information, I am now looking for the books and I am looking at the syrup-nigger's link.
>>56481945
Now they break up on their own! Haha!
>>56482160
Also look into the lives of sharecroppers. A lot of black families went from slavery to sharecropping after the civil war.
>>56481800
This. Depriving someone of their freedom is a horrific crime in itself, but slaves were often better fed, clothed, housed, etc. than workers in the north.
>>56482325
Will do. This may be just a rumour, but I have also heard that a lot of former slaves would go back to their masters and ask for work once they were freed by law.
>>56483288
>This may be just a rumour, but I have also heard that a lot of former slaves would go back to their masters and ask for work once they were freed by law.
hence "sharecropping," anon.
>>56483369
Fair enough! I haven't been able to look up anything on that yet. Reading the link from the Canadian.
